On 3/18/06, Richard Cleis <rcleis at mac.com> wrote:
> I wonder, though, about the 100% drag-drop programming. I am neither a
> father nor an educator, so I am asking those who are: shouldn't the
> children at least see some words that cause the movements, if not be
> encouraged to type a few?
Why aren't the pictures as good as words? I'll grant that I don't
know what the drag/drop structure is, but I'm certain I could design
just as good a visual programming language as there are text ones, and
just as bad a text language as there could be visual ones. Who says
there even are words behind the movements? What if Lego has a fully
pictorial development suite?
That's probably not the case, but I don't see any reason why "words"
have to be part of the programming process. Some friends of mine went
through a CS Master's degree program at Carnegie Mellon where they did
significant amounts of drag-and-drop programming, so clearly the
concept, if not the Lego implementation, is ready for prime-time.
--
Carl Eastlund
"Cynical, but technically correct."